Learning from botched elections

When students return to campus after Spring Break, a month will have passed since the Georgetown University Student Association held elections for its presidential and vice-presidential positions. The student body, however, will still not know the outcome of that election.
As this is the second year in a row that disqualifications have botched GUSA’s executive elections, students should demand a more effective election system than the status quo. Students deserve a GUSA that is concerned about the legitimacy of their own elections and an election commission that can execute its responsibilities effectively, with authority and in a timely matter.
On Feb. 9, after an election-day controversy disqualified Kelly Hampton and Luis Torres, the election’s winning ticket, second-place finishers Adam Giblin and Eric Lashner were announced as GUSA’s president and vice-president elects. Giblin and Lashner have appropriately proceeded to assume those rolls, interviewing candidates for GUSA appointments and laying the groundwork for their administration’s goals. Yet no one is certain whether or not Giblin and Lashner will ultimately be sworn in as the next executives. Hampton and Torres are appealing the election results, claiming that they were improperly disqualified and they deserve the positions.
It should not take over a month for this process to be completed. GUSA, the Election Commission and the Constitutional Council exist to make sure elections run smoothly and, in the case of emergency, settle disputes. What’s the hold up, then?
First, GUSA’s bylaws do not set a deadline for candidates to file appeals of the election commission’s decisions. Hampton and Torres have taken their time to file their appeal to ensure they have collected all evidence in their favor. And who can blame them if they truly think this evidence might win them the positions? This is problematic, however, because GUSA ends up looking foolish, unable to resolve problems from within.
Second, the Election Commission is a 10-person group drawn completely from members of the Senior Class Committee, a group overloaded with responsibility already. In this year’s instance, the group had to clean up a botched election as the Election Commission while at they same running Senior Parents weekend as the Senior Class Committee. GUSA elections are important enough to warrant their own directive body.
Third, year after year the election commission is composed of seniors only. So when mistakes are made, no one is around the following year to help the group learn from them. GUSA should add first years, sophomores and juniors to the commission so that mistakes become lessons learned, not simply mistakes forgotten.
Whoever is ultimately elected to the executive positions should seriously consider revising the election by-laws and creating a more diverse election commission. It would be in their best interests, and the rest of the student body’s as well.